{"title":"The Good Death in Early Modern Europe","authors":"Cynthia Klestinec, Gideon Manning","doi":"10.1111/hic3.12819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The inevitability of death does not change its variability. In <i>The Hour of Our Death</i> (1981), Philippe Ariès positioned the sudden, unexpected, mass death of epidemics (especially from the Black Death) against the personalized, domesticated death for which one had time to prepare. The domesticated death, so he argued, appeared during a specific epoche of European history and was an historical inflection point, coinciding with the 18th century Enlightenment. Ariès looked unfavorably at this climax for what he saw as a process of de-spiritualization, waning of faith, and the beginnings of commercialization and medicalization of death. Since his publications, scholars from a range of fields—history, anthropology, literature, religion, and art—have sought to address the omissions, exaggerations, and misleading claims in Ariès' account and, in doing so, have developed a rich field studying the cultural history and significance of death. Now situated in a transdisciplinary space, studying the good death and the tradition of <i>ars moriendi</i> (the art of the dying well) offers new perspectives and answers new questions about death. Although there is much that could be discussed, the focus here will be on recent trends in scholarship on the tradition of <i>ars moriendi</i> and its relationship to the interrelated histories of burial, the role of clerical and lay comforters, and the role of physicians as well as the historical and religious-philosophical problems of the prolongation of life and sudden death.</p>","PeriodicalId":46376,"journal":{"name":"History Compass","volume":"22 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hic3.12819","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History Compass","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hic3.12819","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The inevitability of death does not change its variability. In The Hour of Our Death (1981), Philippe Ariès positioned the sudden, unexpected, mass death of epidemics (especially from the Black Death) against the personalized, domesticated death for which one had time to prepare. The domesticated death, so he argued, appeared during a specific epoche of European history and was an historical inflection point, coinciding with the 18th century Enlightenment. Ariès looked unfavorably at this climax for what he saw as a process of de-spiritualization, waning of faith, and the beginnings of commercialization and medicalization of death. Since his publications, scholars from a range of fields—history, anthropology, literature, religion, and art—have sought to address the omissions, exaggerations, and misleading claims in Ariès' account and, in doing so, have developed a rich field studying the cultural history and significance of death. Now situated in a transdisciplinary space, studying the good death and the tradition of ars moriendi (the art of the dying well) offers new perspectives and answers new questions about death. Although there is much that could be discussed, the focus here will be on recent trends in scholarship on the tradition of ars moriendi and its relationship to the interrelated histories of burial, the role of clerical and lay comforters, and the role of physicians as well as the historical and religious-philosophical problems of the prolongation of life and sudden death.